88 International Relations Theory of War
empire, but it could not contribute significantly in European conflicts. Brit-
ain quickly understood that if it wanted to have any real influence on the
conduct of major land wars, such as the Crimean War, it had to raise a
large army, whether it was interested in doing so or not. That was a painful
lesson that was relearned in 1914.^62
The Stability of the Multipolar System, 1910–1945In the multipolar system of 1910–1945, there were numerous wars across
the world between countries involving one of the seven polar powers or
the great powers that constituted the system. Two of the wars, the First
and the Second World Wars, stand out compared with the others. The two
World Wars that were fought in the multipolar system support the book’s
argument concerning the dangers lying in a multipolar world.
The First World WarIn international relations research, a number of explanations for the out-
break of the First World War have been discussed.^63 Some of them associate
the outbreak of the war with the comprehensive arms race preceding it.^64
Other studies argue that in the decades preceding the war, a phenomenon
called the “cult of the offensive” swept through Europe, which caused it
to break out.^65 Additional studies argue that the war broke out to a certain
degree because of the détente, a process of thawing of the Anglo-German
relations that took place in 1914.^66 Three additional arguments may be
presented that state the war broke out because of excessive, aggressive
foreign policies and military policies: (A) a mutual incentive for preemp-
tive attacks or rapid mobilization;^67 (B) a rigid organizational routine, par-
ticularly in Germany and Russia, which restricted the freedom of decision
makers through demanding large-scale mobilization and, in the case of
Germany, an early attack once the mobilization was accomplished;^68 and
(C) a cycle of hostility that filled the relations between Germany and the
other European powers that preceded the war. The supporters of this view
argue that the British, French, and Russians reacted to the rise in the power
of Germany, which appeared to be hostile, and that Germany’s defensive
reactions were understood to be offensive and therefore formed the atmo-
sphere that was suitable for the outbreak of the crisis in June 1914.^69
For years, the First World War was mentioned as an example of an
unintentional war. It became the key source of many assumptions on the
subject and serves as a common historical and strategic metaphor in the
nuclear age.^70
The main argument is while the Triple Entente countries preferred a
peaceful solution for the June crisis, both Austro-Hungary and Germany
wanted a war, as long as they believed that it could be limited to the